The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council responded to his request for information, or for his information to be corrected. The Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to consider and decide these matters.
The complaint
Mr X complained about the Council’s response to his Subject Access Request (SAR). He also said the Council holds false information about him on record.
Mr X said the matters caused significant distress.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide there is another body better placed to consider this complaint. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B)) We normally expect someone to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner if they have a complaint about data protection. However, we may decide to investigate if we think there are good reasons. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) was set up by parliament to enforce data protection legislation. The ICO can investigate complaints about data protection.
This includes concerns about how an organisation responded to a SAR, or requests to have inaccurate records corrected.
We will therefore not investigate this complaint. The ICO is better placed to consider it.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to consider it.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman